[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Page 8410]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        REQUEST FOR CONSULTATION

  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my letter to 
Senator McConnell dated May 18, 2010, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                                     May 18, 2010.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Senate Minority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator McConnell: I am requesting that I be consulted 
     before the Senate enters into any unanimous consent 
     agreements or time limitations regarding H.R. 1741, the 
     Witness Security and Protection Grant Program Act of 2009. In 
     short, although I support the goals of this legislation and 
     believe that witness security and protection is essential to 
     the effective administration of justice, I do not believe 
     that the federal government bears responsibility for 
     witnesses in state and local courts. My concerns about H.R. 
     1741 include, but are not necessarily limited to, those 
     outlined in this letter.
       As you know, I am extremely concerned about the Nation's 
     fiscal well-being. The national debt is nearly $13 trillion 
     and rising, which amounts to almost $42,000 owed by each U.S. 
     citizen. Moreover, Congress recently raised the national debt 
     ceiling by nearly $2 trillion, and the federal government 
     borrows 41 cents for every dollar that it spends. This dire 
     situation demands that Congress address its spending 
     addiction and adhere strictly to the enumerated powers 
     defined by Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.
       Providing basic services such as witness security and 
     protection in state courts is the obligation of the states. 
     Budgets everywhere are tight, but state and local 
     governments--like the federal government--must set priorities 
     and eliminate wasteful spending in order to ensure that the 
     highest responsibilities are fulfilled.
       Although the Nation's debt crisis demonstrates that 
     Congress no longer has the luxury of funding anything other 
     than the highest federal priorities, I would note that 
     federal dollars are already available for the same purposes 
     contained in H.R. 1741. Those funding sources are as follows:
       Edward Byrne Memorial Grant Programs--One of the seven 
     permissible purposes of Byrne/JAG funds is ``crime victim and 
     witness programs'' (P.L. 109162). Significant amounts of 
     federal dollars are available through this program. In 
     FY2009, Congress provided more than $2.5 billion in JAG 
     funding, and in FY2010, Congress provided $519 million for 
     the same programs. In addition to this JAG funding, which is 
     awarded on a formula basis, Congress provided a total of 
     $178.5 million in FY2009 and $185.3 million in FY2010 in 
     Byrne ``discretionary'' funding. This money, totaling $363.8 
     million, was awarded in the form of congressional earmarks. 
     Competitive funding was limited to $30 million in FY2009 and 
     $40 million in FY2010. In total, the federal government sent 
     approximately $3.4 billion to state and local law enforcement 
     through Byrne grant programs in the last two fiscal years 
     alone. To the extent that states need federal funding for 
     witness protection and security, it would seem that there is 
     ample funding available and that they should consider 
     prioritizing such projects in their requests and budgets.
       U.S. Marshals--Current law, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3521, authorizes 
     the Attorney General to provide for relocation and other 
     protection of state witnesses, as well as their family 
     members or close associates, in certain circumstances. That 
     law allows the Attorney General to provide relocation and 
     other protection for state witnesses, as well as their family 
     members or close associates, where there is concern for a 
     witnesses' safety. It allows for, but does not require, 
     reimbursement by the State (18 U.S.C. 3526(b)(1)).
       Community-Based Justice Grants for Prosecutors Program--
     Existing law, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 13862, already authorizes 
     federal grants for state and local governments to ``create 
     and expand witness and victim protection programs to prevent 
     threats, intimidation, and retaliation against victims of, 
     and witnesses to, violent crimes.'' This authorization, 
     enacted in 2008, has never been appropriated. Although it 
     remains my belief that Congress lacks both the resources and 
     the responsibility for funding such programs, it should be 
     noted that the statutory authority to provide for state 
     witness protection already exists.
       I regret that I am unable to support H.R. 1741. Again, I 
     share concerns for the safety of citizens who participate in 
     our justice system. I believe, however, that the Nation's 
     skyrocketing debt demands that Congress make tough spending 
     choices. Where responsibility lies with state and local 
     governments to provide a service, and especially where 
     federal money is already available, I cannot consent to 
     spending additional taxpayer dollars for the same purpose.
           Sincerely,
                                              Tom A. Coburn, M.D.,
     United States Senator.

                          ____________________